Judge: Craig Griffin, Case: "Alpha Trading, Inc. v. General Star Indemnity Company", Date: 2023-07-24 Tentative Ruling

Plaintiff Alpha Trading, Inc.’s (“Plaintiff”) motion to strike the cross-complaint of Defendant General Star Indemnity Company (“Defendant”) is DENIED.

Pursuant to Code Civ. Proc., § 436, the Court may “strike out any irrelevant, false or improper matter inserted in any pleading” and “strike out all or any part of any pleading not drawn or filed in conformity with the laws of the state, a court rule, or an order of the court.”  (C.C.P. § 436(a), (b).)

Here, while Plaintiff cites authority pertaining to declaratory relief actions in general and the court’s power to strike irrelevant, false or improper matter and strike pleadings not drawn in conformity with laws, court rules or court orders, Plaintiff cites no authority supporting the contention that a properly pleaded cross-complaint for declaratory relief should be stricken in its entirety because the plaintiff’s complaint requests declaratory relief on the same issue.

Moreover, Code Civ. Proc., § 436(a) does not authorize the court to strike a whole pleading.  (See Ferraro v. Camarlinghi (2008) 161 Cal.App.4th 509, 528.)  In addition, section 436(b) also does not support Plaintiff’s motion because the Cross-Complaint here was not filed in violation of any law, court order, or court rule.  (Id.)

Because Defendant’s Cross-Complaint is authorized by Code Civ. Proc., §§ 428.10 and 1060, and Plaintiff failed to cite authority showing that it is proper for the court to strike the entire Cross-Complaint under the circumstances of this case, the court will DENY the motion.

Plaintiff is to file an answer to the Cross-Complaint within 10 days.

Defendant’s request for judicial notice is GRANTED.  (Evid. Code § 452(d).)

Counsel for Defendant is to give notice.